Eyer v. Forks Township

Stewart, P. J.,

This is a motion for judgment non obstante veredicto. Upon the trial, the defendant presented a point, “Under the law and the evidence, the verdict must be for the defendant.” After the verdict, the defendant made a motion for a new trial, and we granted a rule to show cause. The third reason was that the verdict was against the law and the evidence. Technically speaking, we perhaps might have to make the latter rule absolute and compel the defendant, on the new trial, to put in that which was omitted on the present trial, and which we think is the most important matter…